I__. - International Military Testing Association

are used to examine the processes associated with product quality
after the group has accepted the need for change.
LESSONS LEARNED
In December 1989, Clark (1989) reported several lessons learned
during the TQM program at AFHRL. The following is a summary of
additional lessons learned.
Facilitators. --_-----e--- Facilitators must be familiar with TQM quality
improvement procedures and with OD techniques for gaining program
acceptance. Facilitators should also be able to train people in
TQM and OD. It is best to use facilitators who are not a part of
the management group that is initiating TQM. Facilitators need
the independence and authority to run the program as approved.
Organizations sometimes appoint their own facilitator and conduct
a do-it-yourself TQM program. An alternative is to hire a fulltime,
thoroughly trained facilitator from outside the
organization who can offer TQM alternatives. Facilitators should
not impose their own philosophy on an organization or direct a
specific TQM approach. The organization should develop its own TOM
approach based on its unique requirements.
Process ------- Action ------ ----- Teams ----_-* (PATS) The role of PATS in a TQM program is
to examine manufacturing and administrative processes and Improve
the quality of service to the customer. Twenty months into the
TQM program at AFHRL, 380 people were asked: How
valuable are the process action teams at AFHRL? Twenty-one
percent of the 94 people answering said, 'No Value.' Thirty -
five percent said, 'Some Value'; 31% said, 'Moderate Value'; and
13% said, 'Significant Value.' These results were surprising
because, throughout the TQM program, people said the PATS were the
most effective and worthwhile part of the program. We expected
more people to say the PAT's were of significant value.
Written comments from the survey showed that peopie who said
PATS were of no value were either not aware of what the PATS were
doing, felt the PATS created too much bureaucratic busy work, or
thought the PATS were not addressing the right problems.
People who rated them highly said the PATS increased
communications, involved people from lower levels, and proposed
effective solutions to problems.
Most PATS at AFHRL worked on improving administrative procedures.
There was less progress in improving the quality of the laboratory
R&D product and customer satisfaction. PATS should spend a majcr
portion of their time working on product improvement and customer
Satisfaction. Excessive attention to administrative procedures
can be a symptom of undue concern about management and too 11++"tile
concern about customer satisfaction and product quality.
PATS are not the solution to all problems. It is easy t0 defer
decisions to a committee without exercising leadership. L??me